3rd expansion or spin-off poll

[Temppu]

What is with the rush to speculate post-GS time before even the first look is revealed? Patience, my dear fanatics.

 

[Xur]

Where's option 3? Get another lead game designer, fire the art designer, hire a team of AI programmers and start work on civ7. Make civ great again

 

[Leyrann]

fire the art designer,

You're joking, right?

 

[Victoria]

fire the art designer,

Artists draw, managers decide. The cartoonish style is certainly not my choice and one suspects it was not the artists either.

 

[Rup]

I freaking love the art style of Civilization VI.Civilization 5 became muddy awful to look at after several hours of playing it.

 

[LastSword]

Don't take everything literally. The essence was to change art direction. Most likely the lead graphics director was an "artist" anyway and there were discussions.

I think that art direction was the biggest civ6 change to genre and I personally don't like it. The world have never felt so small, great animations wasted by black fading, governors happened. I can understand the overall style, it had to attract a new, younger playerbase, which I hope it did.

I would like 3rd expansion.

 

[Morningcalm]

I thought Civ: Colonization was a great spinoff, and it had excellent music too. If a Mythology-focused Civ spinoff came into being, I'm sure that with sufficient polish it would be quite marvelous. It would also give the artists a chance to draw some cool creatures, like phoenixes, dragons, nereids, and hydras.

 

[Rup]

I can understand the overall style, it had to attract a new, younger playerbase, which I hope it did.

We are living in a world where Call of duty is played mostly by kids and pokemon by adult.So I think it is highly unlikely that.
Most teens wouldn't prefer the stylish look as they tend to prefer realistic graphics.But as someone who bought the latest most power GPU for the past 18 years, I am bored with realistic graphics.
Teens generally prefer more ralistic and gore graphic than adults.Unless by kids you mean 5-10 years old.
Civilization 6 looks beautiful.Art style might not be for everyone though.This type of art style age really well.

 

[Xur]

We are living in a world where Call of duty is played mostly by kids and pokemon by adult.So I think it is highly unlikely that.
Most teens wouldn't prefer the stylish look as they tend to prefer realistic graphics.But as someone who bought the latest most power GPU for the past 18 years, I am bored with realistic graphics.
Teens generally prefer more ralistic and gore graphic than adults.Unless by kids you mean 5-10 years old.

Sorry, but I’ll have to say that this is bullfeathers. I’m closing in on 40 and I hate the disney look. I’m sure there’s people my age that likes it - just as there’s teens liking it and hating it. Nothing to do with age.

 

[Rup]

Sorry, but I’ll have to say that this is bullfeathers. I’m closing in on 40 and I hate the disney look. I’m sure there’s people my age that likes it - just as there’s teens liking it and hating it. Nothing to do with age.

I particularly replied to someone who said it looks stylish so that to attract younger people. So yes it has nothing to do with age.
I loved CIV V art style but after 500 hours in it I started hating it but for CIV VI I am not getting bored of the art style.
Look at how Wind waker aged and how Twilight princess aged

 

[Xur]

I particularly replied to someone who said it looks stylish so that to attract younger people. So yes it has nothing to do with age.
I loved CIV V art style but after 500 hours in it I started hating it but for CIV VI I am not getting bored of the art style.
Look at how Wind waker aged and how Twilight princess aged

We get a new civ game every ~5 years, so who cares how it ages. Realistic styles will always show its age as tech improves. Civ games were never about the graphics. I played it because it was fun, DESPITE the graphics were worse than games released at the same time. I can tolerate poor graphics with good gameplay... I cant tolerate disney graphics with poor gameplay. So what good is civ6 to me in 20 years? It aged well? Hmm, useful.... yeaa

 

[Rup]

We get a new civ game every ~5 years, so who cares how it ages. Realistic styles will always show its age as tech improves. Civ games were never about the graphics. I played it because it was fun, DESPITE the graphics were worse than games released at the same time. I can tolerate poor graphics with good gameplay... I cant tolerate disney graphics with poor gameplay. So what good is civ6 to me in 20 years? It aged well? Hmm, useful.... yeaa

Because people still enjoy old games a lot.Sequel doesn't always mean a better game or a game that scratch the same itch.
I think for a game in which people spend 100s or perhaps 1000s of hour, it should be pleasant to look at.

Reality is broken AF and an artist can fix it.

I might enjoy CIV VI 10 or more years from now.People still love Daggerfall , Morrowind , Wind walker and I can go on and on.All those games have a proper sequel but doesn't scratch the same itch.

I used to think like you too when I was younger.

There are quite a lot of people who will never move to Civilization 6 from 5 or those who haven't moved from 4 to 5.Personally speaking they will have to do a hell of a job if they want to make me shift from VI to VII.

I cannot stand Civilization 5's muddy look.

PS:Look at how beautiful Settlers 2019 is looking with the same art style.

 

[AriochIV]

What is with the rush to speculate post-GS time before even the first look is revealed? Patience, my dear fanatics.

I think it's because people need something to grab on to when they see that their pet feature or change or civ isn't in GS.

 

[rlw33]

I'd love to see a remake of Alpha Centauri.

 

[Spyhawk]

I'd love to see a remake of Alpha Centauri.

We already had that one, it is wasn't successful.

I wish for a 3rd expansion that focus on the rough edges of GS and biggest weaknesses, rather than adding overpacked new features and unnecessary systems. Maybe an expansion that focus on adding very few new systems, plus some specialized gameplay (like Venice) with extra civilizations. Just enough content needed to "sell" the expansion, but whose primary purpose is to focus on polish and better AI.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

We already had that one, it is wasn't successful.

I wish for a 3rd expansion that focus on the rough edges of GS and biggest weaknesses, rather than adding overpacked new features and unnecessary systems. Maybe an expansion that focus on adding very few new systems, plus some specialized gameplay (like Venice) with extra civilizations. Just enough content needed to "sell" the expansion, but whose primary purpose is to focus on polish and better AI.

That wasn't really a remake of AC. It was a space civ game, yeah, but AC was all about the storyline and the writing and mood, and BE was a totally different story.

 

[Spyhawk]

Yes, but that was all we got. It was the AC remake, albeit a not very good one. There are also some IP issues here (Alpha Centauri doesn't belong to Firaxis/2K).

 

[HanNorwood]

A third expansion would be good, I think, even if it's mostly to finish filling up the map with some civs from open TSL areas and that players want. Vietnam, Babylon, and Ethiopia spring to mind as prime candidates for a third expansion.

However, I think a DLC leader pack would be good, that adds alternate leaders for some civs. It could include a Pre-Industrial president for America (Maybe Monroe with an emphasis on protecting city-states), a non-viking leader for Norway, a war focused emperor for Rome. I think it would be good to give some of the "niche" civs, that aren't especially versatile, a little more room to perform.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Yes, but that was all we got. It was the AC remake, albeit a not very good one. There are also some IP issues here (Alpha Centauri doesn't belong to Firaxis/2K).

It was all we can get but I'm not sure I'd call it a remake (or even an attempt at one). It's the same concept of "Civ in Space" but that's as far as it goes. But I know what you mean--they couldn't so AC so they did that instead. And while it it some really neat ideas it never really "did it" for me.

 

[Leyrann]

We get a new civ game every ~5 years, so who cares how it ages. Realistic styles will always show its age as tech improves. Civ games were never about the graphics. I played it because it was fun, DESPITE the graphics were worse than games released at the same time. I can tolerate poor graphics with good gameplay... I cant tolerate disney graphics with poor gameplay. So what good is civ6 to me in 20 years? It aged well? Hmm, useful.... yeaa

Calm down man. Your opinion is just, well, your opinion. Of course you're free to have it, but please respect other people's opinions as well. Rather than just ranting on the edge of caps lock.

For the record, I absolutely love the Civ VI graphics (if we're still comparing to age, which I think is bollocks, I'm 22), and I know I'm not alone; there's by no means unanimity on this forum, but I'd wager that the majority of the people here really likes them.